[RV7Guy]

Okay, for those of you are current instructors or who have recently taken the FAA Instrument Written, what was the major emphasis?

The reason I'm asking is that the Gleim on line course has a very extensive section on the ADF. I spent 4 hours in this section and maybe could have been using my time more wisely. I bust my butt on that section and there might be one or two questions on the test.

I'm trying to cram for the exam so I don't want too much time between studying and test taking. My retention just isn't as good as it once was!!!

Help me out folks!!!

 

[Louise Hose]

No short cuts

The reason I'm asking is that the Gleim on line course has a very extensive section on the ADF. I spent 4 hours in this section and maybe could have been using my time more wisely. I bust my butt on that section and there might be one or two questions on the test.

I took the test within the last year. I studied the FAA questions (which, I presume, your materials from Gleim includes) and the written test had the whole range of questions including the even more archaic nav systems. The written test in mostly an exercise in rote memory and the selection of questions seems like a random generator derived selection from the complete test bank. No shortcuts and no applying logic to which questions are most important.

The good news? You only need a 70% to pass the exam. The bad news? The scoring sheet identifies which areas you showed weakness in and the practical test examiner may focus on those ares.

 

[n5lp]

...including the even more archaic nav systems...

Ah, just the person I need to talk to, someone that knows about the even more archaic nav systems.

It happens I recently took a flight review and AN ranges came up. I have an old memory that approaches based on the system (AN Range Approach?) had MDAs similar to what DH is for today's ILS systems.

I resolved to study up on how these approaches were done. I do recall the "cone of silence" which I would think is equivalent to station passage with an NDB, but I have been unable unable to come up with the information on the usually trusty internet.

So Louise, do you are anyone else have a pointer to this information? Some of the difficulty may be doing a search for an, which is a very common letter combination.

 

[John Clark]

Examiner's focus

The bad news? The scoring sheet identifies which areas you showed weakness in and the practical test examiner may focus on those ares.

I think it is closer to will focus on those areas.

John Clark ATP CFI
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

 

[Blaine Asay]

IFR ADF

The written test covers all of the nav systems. In detail. The practical only covers what is in your plane. My examiner didn't ask any ADF questions.
Blaine

 

[G-force]

Give this a try to help studying. Its basicaly all the questions you will find in the Gleims book. I found it really helpfull for the PPL written. I did 10 questions at a time, as many times as I could stand each evening. By the time I took the test, I getting between zero and 1 wrong per 10 and ended up with a 94% on the test. Be sure to change the test to "instrument."

http://www.exams4pilots.org/

 

[Ironflight]

So Louise, do you are anyone else have a pointer to this information? Some of the difficulty may be doing a search for an, which is a very common letter combination.

I believe that I have a very old Instrument Flying Handbook at the office Larry - it might have the procedures in it - can't remember for sure. I won't be back to the office till next week, but will try to remember to look. I do remember flying an antique Link trainer once where I actually got to shoot one of those Low Frequency Range approaches, but couldn't give you any more detail than that you either got an "A" or an "N" (Morse code), and if you were "on the beam", they canceled each other out....

There's got to be at least one old-time airline pilot around here who can remember them!

Paul

 

[az_gila]

History

Ah, just the person I need to talk to, someone that knows about the even more archaic nav systems.

It happens I recently took a flight review and AN ranges came up. I have an old memory that approaches based on the system (AN Range Approach?) had MDAs similar to what DH is for today's ILS systems.

I resolved to study up on how these approaches were done. I do recall the "cone of silence" which I would think is equivalent to station passage with an NDB, but I have been unable unable to come up with the information on the usually trusty internet.

So Louise, do you are anyone else have a pointer to this information? Some of the difficulty may be doing a search for an, which is a very common letter combination.

Larry... some history here...

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Evolution_of_Technology/navigation_tech/Tech33.htm

The earliest radio navigation aid was the four-course radio range, which began in 1929. Four towers set in a square transmitted the letters A and N in Morse code. A pilot flying along one of the four beams toward the square would hear only an A or N in the dashes and dots of the code. The dashes and dots grew louder or more faint as he flew, depending if he was flying toward or away from one of the corners. Turning right or left, he would soon hear a different letter being transmitted, telling him which quadrant he had entered.

The beams flared out, so that at certain points they overlapped. Where the A or N signals meshed, the Morse code dashes and dots sounded a steady hum, painting an audio roadway for the pilot. At least 90 such stations were in place by 1933, about 200 miles (322 kilometers) apart along the 18,000-mile (28,968-kilometer) system of lighted towers and rotating beacons. Unfortunately, mountains, mineral deposits, railroad tracks, and even the atmospheric disturbance of the setting sun could distort the signals

This one details how the light system then evolved into the radio range system, and the Postal Service pilots...

http://www.navfltsm.addr.com/howitbegan.htm

http://www.navfltsm.addr.com/ndb-nav-history.htm

Really interesting history... I can remember that the beacon tower in Ann Arbor, MI in the 70's still had the "arms" on it that defined the searchlight course to/from Ann Arbor.

Good reading, even if you are not taking any writtens... gil A

 

[n5lp]

I believe that I have a very old Instrument Flying Handbook at the office Larry - it might have the procedures in it...

...

http://www.navfltsm.addr.com/howitbegan.htm

http://www.navfltsm.addr.com/ndb-nav-history.htm

Really interesting history... I can remember that the beacon tower in Ann Arbor, MI in the 70's still had the "arms" on it that defined the searchlight course to/from Ann Arbor.

Good reading, even if you are not taking any writtens... gil A

Thank you Paul and Gil. I remembered most of that stuff Gil. I'm sure if Paul has that old book it will have the details. Interesting how you were encouraged to fly right of course so as to not hit the guy coming the other way.

What I mostly can't remember is the details of an approach. It must have required a station near the field that would allow an approach similar to an NDB approach where you went through the cone of silence and then did a procedure turn.

I think I may have read a bit about that in an Ernest K. Gann book. I'll look through my bookshelf.

 

[David-aviator]

....I do remember flying an antique Link trainer once where I actually got to shoot one of those Low Frequency Range approaches, but couldn't give you any more detail than that you either got an "A" or an "N" (Morse code), and if you were "on the beam", they canceled each other out....

There's got to be at least one old-time airline pilot around here who can remember them!

Paul

That would be really old!

I do remember a range approach in Canada on the way to Greenland for USAF war alert in the 60's. It may have been at Goose Bay. They did show us how to do it in a Link trainer but it was a last ditch approach if nothing else was working. All I remember is one side was "A" and the other "N" and you tried to stradle it. We were not checked on doing it.
The really old old airline pilots were good at it.

I'm not surprised the FAA instrument written still dwells on ADF. If you guys are lucky, maybe they are not yet spun up on GPS approaches as there could dozens of questions on it.

 

[az_gila]

That was it for approaches...

Thank you Paul and Gil. ....
What I mostly can't remember is the details of an approach. It must have required a station near the field that would allow an approach similar to an NDB approach where you went through the cone of silence and then did a procedure turn.
.....

Larry, that seems to be the case... it's mentioned on the "On the Beam" link in my previous post.....

Station passage was marked by a "cone of silence," where the aural tone briefly disappeared as the aircraft flew directly overhead.

When possible, radio-range stations were located near an airport, and situated so that one of the four beams lined up with the principal runway, "thus facilitating radio approach landings under conditions of low visibility."

Boy... what improvements came with miniature electronics. As a kid, I can remember a Loran set on a ship that was bigger than a dishwasher, and had a readout in Nixie tubes. The readouts were plotted on a map with curved reference lines - where the lines intersected was your position....

Then it fit in a 2.5 inch rack mount with lat/long readout... then it got replaced by even smaller GPS...

gil A - proud to be an electronics engineer....

 

[n5lp]

400 and 1?

I did scan around some in "Fate is the Hunter" and found a reference to 300 feet and a 1/2 mile being "below company standards" in chapter V. So maybe the AN approaches were similar to present day non-precision approaches at about 400 and a mile for minimums.

I would still like to know more details and wonder if there were government standards or just company ones.

 

[frankh]

That was my thought

The written test covers all of the nav systems. In detail. The practical only covers what is in your plane. My examiner didn't ask any ADF questions.
Blaine

The examiner will only test you on what you have in the plane...The less you have the easier your checkride will be.

Of course he could test you on the oral secton I guess...but mine didn't

As to the written I remember almost pulling my hair out at all the archaic nonsense i had to learn about.

You just gotta pound through it. There is a lot of stuff to learn but it is doable.

hang in there

frank